A large "age map" for stars in various regions of the Milky Way has just been released, here's a BBC article about it. I had already known that the galaxy tended to have older stars in the central bulge and younger ones in the disk, but the distribution is a lot more striking than I had anticipated. I've not really paid attention to the distribution of stellar ages in Space Engine before but this suggests that different parts of galaxies should actually have significantly different populations of stars in them.
Combined with the galactic "habitable zone", this should make lifeworld-hunting into a bit more of a strategic thing rather than just sheer random chance.
The center of the galaxy would be where the two blue cones meet, where the youngest stars are. And that is logical. In the center there are more larger stars that explode faster. Therefore, there mainly exist only young star. But it should be a lot more heavy elements in the center, so really good condition for technical civilizations; when the stars were not so close together and would not so often explode.
I'm afraid you interpret the map incorrectly. The center of the galaxy would be where the two blue cones meet, where the youngest stars are.
No, that's incorrect. The place where all the cones converge is the location of Earth, and the red portion is indeed the galactic bulge, which does have mostly older stars. Remember, that blue stars - which give the spiral arms their bluish color - can only be young, while redder stars can be any age. Therefore, bluer portions of the galaxy must have younger stars on average than redder portions. And that is exactly what this map shows.
You're right. I just do not think that once again the earth was made to the center of the universe. It seems to me however to be logical that the rise and fall of stars in the center is faster and there are therefore more younger stars. But there are probably still a lot of old stars there.